Acoustica seems to care about musicians and songwriters. Currently artists are getting paid a fraction of what they deserve. Many of the streaming sites are no well liked for business practices.

An ad driven service could produce more revenue than a subscription site and it would not have to be subject to price wars or promotion costs as the artists will be doing the promotions.

Well... alright, the long and short of it is, streaming sites more or less have to bow to federal regulations when it comes to how much they can pay an artist per song. (That's not to say that they don't price gouge as much as they can - the obviously do, because capitalism, but the current payments are abysmal because by law they kind of have to be?)Streaming is an absolute mess, and while it'd be absolutely stellar for Acoustica to open a streaming service, Acoustica would have a few hurdles to that: 1) server bandwidth for dealing with a lot of streaming data 2) receive enough revenue to cover server costs of said streaming data 3) receive enough revenue to also reimburse artists beyond the current minimum internet stream payment rates 4) receive licenses for all that music, because a successful streaming service will have to compete with Spotify, Apple Music, etc. who all have these massive music libraries that they've acquired through tons of legal contracts.

Not to shoot this down because it's a bad idea, because it's not, but it's very ambitious, as in "open a brand new company and start writing a prospectus in order to receive venture capital" ambitious.

daveiv wrote:You might want to get rid of the Kjaerhus plugins, or at least remove the sticker from their GUI in the near future.

I need a way (other than stacking instruments) of getting what I'm recording onto for example ten different tracks at the same time (I like improvising with giant sounds) in such a way as to only have to edit 1 copy of the notes i.e. have all the tracks use the same recorded notes in the same way as each track can accept the same send effects with the same settings. So it would be a 'Send Notes' menu option similar to the 'record all tracks automation' menu option

Ian Craig wrote:I need a way (other than stacking instruments) of getting what I'm recording onto for example ten different tracks at the same time (I like improvising with giant sounds) in such a way as to only have to edit 1 copy of the notes i.e. have all the tracks use the same recorded notes in the same way as each track can accept the same send effects with the same settings. So it would be a 'Send Notes' menu option similar to the 'record all tracks automation' menu option

Hi,

Have you played around with Route To Track? You can send the MIDI from multiple tracks to one track.

Ian Craig wrote:Brilliant Greg, I was hoping you might know how to do it. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. (Each thank you on it's own track obviously)

You're welcome! That was kind of a stealth feature we added to Mixcraft 8. It was added so you can use tracks instead of lanes when working with multi-timbrel instruments like Kontakt, but it also obviously has other uses.

Mark Bliss wrote:Anyway, bottom line, it's not really just the DAW developer at fault for the oddities you experience. It's in part a lack of standardization and the resultant variations in implementation.

Afternoon!

I suppose so, but when the Steinberg Model E presets don’t port over to MC, I think we can rule some of that out, lol.

The point isn’t to assign blame, but it would make MC even more wonderful for the novice if it went the extra mile to accommodate the presets, because very very few of them work.

bigaquarium wrote:Being able to add automation values to individual notes in the same manner as say velocity and duration would be very handy, so you could assign filter envelope values that way for instance.

Mark Bliss wrote:Anyway, bottom line, it's not really just the DAW developer at fault for the oddities you experience. It's in part a lack of standardization and the resultant variations in implementation.

Afternoon!

I suppose so, but when the Steinberg Model E presets don’t port over to MC, I think we can rule some of that out, lol.

The point isn’t to assign blame, but it would make MC even more wonderful for the novice if it went the extra mile to accommodate the presets, because very very few of them work.

To be honest, I had to review what this was even about.... Ok, I am not familiar with what a "Steinberg Model E" is, (except maybe that it could be a grand piano emulation. The "Model E" I am familiar with has no presets and needs several strong people to move. But it's a "SteinWAY" )And I am not sure we are talking about the same thing anyway.My comment was about how the DAW (host) usually provides a plug in "box" for the VST or VSTi GUI with an area for presets that often has no content, while the plug in GUI itself usually provides another built in preset area (of some sort or configuration, often baffling and unintuitive) that contains the plug-ins presets.Every plug-in developer seems to have a different idea of how this should work and their own folder location to store their presets in. Without some form of standardization here, it would be pretty difficult for the host to do any better. And though my experience with other DAWs isn't very deep or extensive, I haven't seen where any do much better than any other in this regard. I could be wrong.I suppose you could be implying Steinberg should be following the standard as well as it could be, since they developed it, but I have found their own plug ins to be just as randomly screwy (technical term) as any others. But I think maybe the "standard" simply didn't cover this aspect very well or something.

Hi, yes! I was going to ask you if you can route VSTi parameters like filter/resonance to the CC section?

-N

Nathan, if you look at Greg's picture example above double click where it says (131) at the bottom and you can manually enter any of the 128 CC numbers and it will be applied (I didn't know about this for ages either, as it is effectively hidden for some unknown reason). Presumably, though I don't remember trying it in the last couple of years, it will send out those CCs to external equipment (I'm pretty sure it does anyway). The only problem is that as there is no spline system, it involves manually adjusting each bar if you want to be precise, so that's probably why I don't remember. It's probably just easier to use the automation system, though that lacks precision also

Ian Craig wrote:The only problem is that as there is no spline system, it involves manually adjusting each bar if you want to be precise, so that's probably why I don't remember. It's probably just easier to use the automation system, though that lacks precision also

Morning!

I wonder if you can hold <Shift> to at least get more precision when you are adjusting the bars, will have to try it out!